What's going on in Copernicus crater?

Originally posted by arianna
We have not seen a catologue of images from the Japanese or Chinese missions to the moon. Is there something they do not want the general public to
see and that is why they have witheld thousands of images?

From what I remember, China said that the photos were Chinese and they wouldn't publish them to the world, but the data (not only photos) from
Kaguya/Selene (the Japanese mission) has been available for some time, that's why I have posted several photos from there (remember the Copernicus
photo I posted in December?).

You can see below a Kaguya/Selene photo of the area that has been discussed (if I'm not mistaken), and although it's a "top down" view, as the Sun
was not much high over the horizon, there are shadows that show that this was not taken with "ambient light", and there's also some of those
brighter areas.

The image above is just 5% the size of the original, you can download the original image (converted to a 178 MB PNG file)
here (I hope).

Sorry for the bad file hosting, but it's difficult to get a place to host such large files.

The reason why many people would like to see the K/S images of the Apollo landing sites is because it would prove beyond any doubt that the landings
took place and would stop all the wild speculation and conspiracy theories that can be read on other parts of the forum. If the resolution was
7m/pixel, it's obvious that not much would be seen anyway.

I've had a look at the surface detail in the image you posted and feel that what can be seen is dust scatter. Whatever happened at this location
would not seem conducive with an impact but something else. I have to say that the close-up views of the surface detail around this particular
location are interesting to say the least.

The reason why many people would like to see the K/S images of the Apollo landing sites is because it would prove beyond any doubt that the landings
took place and would stop all the wild speculation and conspiracy theories that can be read on other parts of the forum. If the resolution was
7m/pixel, it's obvious that not much would be seen anyway.

I hate to tell you this, but, even then Moon Landing Hoaxers would still be around. Even if you put them on a rocket and sent them to the moon, landed
them at any of the Apollo landing sites and they saw the equipment left there, they would still claim it was all a hoax.

They would claim that the US put that stuff there and made it look like we had landed there. For them, there is no evidence that is good enough,
because their belief that it was all a hoax, is akin to an almost religious faith.

It seems even Arianna has run out of unrealistic and fantasy posts about ythe moon and it's "art centered" civilization.

Shock.

don't count on it. Who has time to post when doing real research? Don't forget there is a bunch of new Mars photos to go
through...pixel by pixel. Personally, I would like to hear more about the tiny Martian folk. It is quite an obsession of mine. My son (10) pointed
to ant hill the other day and said "look! a huge tiny civilization!"

Thank you for the laugh this morning. Was nice on a rainy day as this.

You definitely appear to be someone who really likes to take the mickey out of other seriou s members.

Chamberf=6, I would like to ask you a straight question and I would like you to reply honestly. Have you carried out any real in-depth research of
Mars or the moon? If you have you would know that it can be a very time consuming exercise that requires a high degree of patience and dedication.

As for finding out more about the tiny people on Mars, I think we will have to wait a while to see what Curiosity comes up with. In the meantime,
there are plenty of fine examples showing in the images that have been returned by the Opportunity and Spirit missions.

You definitely appear to be someone who really likes to take the mickey out of other seriou s members.

Chamberf=6, I would like to ask you a straight question and I would like you to reply honestly. Have you carried out any real in-depth research of
Mars or the moon? If you have you would know that it can be a very time consuming exercise that requires a high degree of patience and dedication.

As for finding out more about the tiny people on Mars, I think we will have to wait a while to see what Curiosity comes up with. In the meantime,
there are plenty of fine examples showing in the images that have been returned by the Opportunity and Spirit missions.

Serious research downloading pictures and then butchering them (check the histograms YOU are!!!)

You definitely appear to be someone who really likes to take the mickey out of other seriou s members.

Chamberf=6, I would like to ask you a straight question and I would like you to reply honestly. Have you carried out any real in-depth research of
Mars or the moon? If you have you would know that it can be a very time consuming exercise that requires a high degree of patience and dedication.

As for finding out more about the tiny people on Mars, I think we will have to wait a while to see what Curiosity comes up with. In the meantime,
there are plenty of fine examples showing in the images that have been returned by the Opportunity and Spirit missions.

Serious research downloading pictures and then butchering them (check the histograms YOU are!!!)

MM high race of people and serious in the same paragraph

Good one keep it up arianna

You seem hell-bent on histograms for some reason but I have to say yes, this exactly what the NASA/JPL scientists do all the time. They download the
images from the mission then enhance them to 'bring out' the finer detail. Therefore, what's good enough for the scientists is good enough for me.

Anyway, the type of comments you are making are derogatory in nature and I politely ask you to stop. It would be better if you added something
constructive for a change or is that beyond your capabilities?

Originally posted by arianna
You seem hell-bent on histograms for some reason but I have to say yes, this exactly what the NASA/JPL scientists do all the time. They download the
images from the mission then enhance them to 'bring out' the finer detail. Therefore, what's good enough for the scientists is good enough for
me.

From the images I have seen both from you and from NASA/JPL (or any other science related group), the difference is that they do not remove
information from the area they are analysing. Yes, the changes they do can (and many times do) remove information, but from other parts of the image
they are not focusing on. What they do is to choose an area and, without worrying about the rest of the image, they change the image in a way that
shows that interest area show the most information possible.

What you have been doing is affecting the whole image, including the area that you are interested in, so instead of making it show the most
information possible you reduce the amount of information also in that area.

You are quite right ArMaP, the enhancement process I have used on some of the images affects the whole image. The action I carried out was deliberate
as some of the NASA images were not of the quality that one would wish to work with to make a reasonable analysis.

At least your reply recognizes that the science staff who process the mission images do change the detail in some of the images.

Chamberf=6, I would like to ask you a straight question and I would like you to reply honestly. Have you carried out any real in-depth research of
Mars or the moon? If you have you would know that it can be a very time consuming exercise that requires a high degree of patience and dedication.

I have done studies on the moon and its (relative) neighbor Mars. It does take patience.

Nothing, repeat nothing even suggests civilizations on the moon or (currently) Mars.

I understand that your post to me was meant to disqualify my thoughts and that is fine, since your theories and beLIEfs are fantastical to say the
least.

If you take issue with my asking very basic questions, then this is not my problem, but yours.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.